Angel Airlines v Dean and Dean

Angel Airlines v Dean and Dean

The Costs Judge was correct to find that the appellant's without prejudice offer did not amount to a special circumstance under s.70(10) of the Solicitors Act 1974 due to its lateness, lack of clarity, and failure to address costs consequences; interest under the 1994 Order was discretionary and not mandatory, and the Costs Judge's exercise of discretion was proper; the order requiring the appellant to pay half the costs of the 5 December 2005 hearing was justified by the failed application for a stay.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Angel Airlines (a Romanian Company in Liquidation); Defendant/appellant: Dean and Dean
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Judge
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitors' Costs, Detailed Assessment, Interest on Costs, Without Prejudice Offers, Case Management
Civil Procedure Costs Solicitors' Costs Detailed Assessment Interest on Costs Without Prejudice Offers Case Management

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angel Airlines (a Romanian Company in Liquidation)

Claimant/respondent

Dean and Dean

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a without prejudice offer amounted to special circumstances under s.70(9) and (10) of the Solicitors Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to interest on assessed costs as of right under the Solicitors (Non-Contentious) Remuneration Order 1994
  3. 3 Whether the Costs Judge's order requiring the appellant to pay half the costs of a hearing was perverse

Ratio Decidendi

The Costs Judge was correct to find that the appellant's without prejudice offer did not amount to a special circumstance under s.70(10) of the Solicitors Act 1974 due to its lateness, lack of clarity, and failure to address costs consequences; interest under the 1994 Order was discretionary and not mandatory, and the Costs Judge's exercise of discretion was proper; the order requiring the appellant to pay half the costs of the 5 December 2005 hearing was justified by the failed application for a stay.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed in its entirety
  • Costs Judge's orders affirmed